Carragher, Abdo and the verbal grenade on CBS that made everyone squirm
When Micah Richards isn’t smiling, you know you’re in trouble.
Jamie Carragher’s attack on Kate Abdo, in which she threw a verbal grenade that jokingly seemed to suggest she was not faithful to her partner Malik Scott, made for hard watching.
If you saw it on CBS Sports Golazo during Arsenal’s coverage against Porto in the Champions League, you will immediately remember the cringe. Maybe you screwed up your face, maybe you covered your eyes, maybe you pulled your T-shirt over your head, Fabrizio Ravanelli style.
Even if you don’t live in the United States or watch CBS’s Champions League coverage, there’s a chance the clip has appeared on your social media timeline — as is usually the case with CBS’ banter segments.
If you’re not familiar with CBS, host Abdo and guests Carragher, Richards and Thierry Henry helped revolutionize soccer coverage in the United States. Their mix of analysis and verbal jousting is very good and very watchable. Their chemistry is undeniable and infectious.
CBS responds to this by cutting out the funniest moments and distributing them on social media. If you live in Britain and still harbor an addictive urge to scour Twitter, you’ll probably be more familiar with the comedy than the analysis, especially the mick-taking intros that follow a formula involving Henry and Carragher’s performances are enlarged and then a comment on the lack of silverware Richards won in his career (despite the Premier League title).
Henry will raise his eyebrows and purse his lips, Carragher will make an exaggeratedly loud exclamation sound, Richards will shout something like, “Kate’s gone for BIG MEEKS.”
Anyway, it’s all in good fun.
On this particular occasion, however, Carragher’s full-throttle chatter was not tweeted by CBS. It didn’t even make the channel’s 10-minute YouTube compilation of “best of our reporting” because it was awkward.
Carragher, wearing an Arsenal top lobbed from the crowd, suggests that Henry and Abdo wear it next.
“I’m loyal,” she says. “To who?” Carragher asks. “Manchester United, thank you very much,” Abdo replies.
“Not to Malik,” says Carragher. Oh damn. Richards, who rarely comments, stares silently at his shoes. Henry turns and looks at Carragher. Abdo seems shocked: “What… how would you even say that?”
Carragher laughs nervously and bellows a line about how Malik’s name hasn’t been mentioned on the show yet. It’s extremely cringe and only lacks a disapproving groan from Gary Neville.
The jousting was nothing new, it’s an important part of the show, but is it okay? Is it acceptable? Even if it was a joke, is this what we want from our broadcasters?
Or is it just a transgressive moment that was completely unavoidable, while it seems like presents and pundits are encouraged to create ‘snippets of banter’ that go viral on social media?
“The format of our show is quite light-hearted,” Carragher has previously said The Athletics. “I’m just very determined to make good TV. Kate can push and some people want to be pushed.
“Some people I couldn’t say certain things to. That’s why we have that relationship where we feel like we can all get away with anything. Everyone knows it’s fair game and if you leave yourself open, you have to expect what’s coming.”
If they like formatting the show that way – locker room jokes for a mainstream football audience – and people like watching it, what’s the problem?
In this case the line was clearly crossed and to be fair to Abdo & Co this was expertly discussed at the start of the following evening’s show.
Another HIT @kate_abdo introduction 🥲❤️ pic.twitter.com/SeyhgMfeGU
— CBS Sports Golazo ⚽️ (@CBSSportsGolazo) March 13, 2024
Abdo said that in the three and a half years the group has worked together, she has gained three brothers, whom Carragher calls the annoying middle child who can say anything to get attention, who can go too far but will always apologize. Nicely done.
The Athletics Also contacted CBS for comment.
When the game’s lawmakers are flirting with making football matches shorter because people don’t have enough attention spans to watch 90 minutes, you can completely understand why broadcasters feel the need to produce snappier shows with shorter segments and light entertainment to keep the viewer entertained. rather than an hour of solid pre-match interviews and forecasts.
It feels like we’re in the second era of football banter. The first was, well, very much of its time, ending in 2011 when Richard Keys’ prehistoric ramblings collapsed (‘Keysy’ even had the audacity to take to social media this week to denounce Carragher and the show couples because they were ‘too exaggerated’. pally”).
Around this time, Neville joined Sky and ushered in the smart, analytical era with his Monday Night Football deep dive and expected goals and all that came with it.
There was still room for it bantz but it was weak overall as everyone figured out what the new status quo was in a post-Keys/Gray world.
Charlie Nicholas tried, “Well, maybe you should go too then Jeff, ’cause you couldn’t see it the other day you were driving home, ’cause on TV you don’t even wear your glasses in case you get slaughtered, so just stay to Specsavers and I’ll play the game.” Precisely.
And now we are at Banter 2.0. Football coverage for the social media age; controversial statements or snappy jokes that can be quickly cut into twenty seconds and retweeted by thousands. This era gives us Roy Keane telling people to do their job, Alan Shearer not winning the FA Cup and Big Meeks bursting onto the scene. Even Neville has embraced the soundbite era. He sings Chelsea songs before the Carabao Cup final because he doesn’t like Liverpool.
A reflection of society in 2024? A good show with one bad moment? Or should we strive for better from our football coverage?
As Abdo said in the clip addressing Carragher’s comment – which has been viewed more than 13.7 million times – “Here we are, another day, another show.” The chatter continues.
(Top photo: Robbie Jay Barratt – AMA/Getty Images)